Central Asia Meeting on Journalism in Internet Age

Friday, 5 February, 2010

The link has been copied

Aigul Bolotova

Human Rights Reporting Project Coordinator, Kyrgyzstan

Dina Tokbaeva

Central Asia Editor

An IWPR round table on the issues facing online journalism in Central Asia served as platform to facilitate dialogue between civil society and the authorities.

The meeting called Human Rights-related Internet Initiatives and Online Journalism in Central Asia, held in Bishkek on November 24, brought together media experts, officials, members of parliament, civil society activists and representatives of international organisations.

The aim of the round table was to produce recommendations to governments, civil society and the media community to make use of the internet more effective.

IWPR invited officials to take away the recommendations from round table participants and put them to the decision makers at the highest level of government. This in turn should ensure that the views of rights activists are heard before attempts are made to introduce internet legislation.

Participants also discussed current obstacles faced by civil society activists in using the internet more effectively to publicise their work.

The event received extensive coverage in the press of Central Asia and was mentioned on the websites of the Bishkek press club, Kyrgyz news agency 24.kg, leading Tajik news agency Asia Plus, Internews-Kazakstan and popular Kazak opposition newspaper Respublika.kz as well as many others.

Kyrgyzstan media picked up a speech to the round table made by a member of the Kyrgyz parliament from the ruling Ak Jol party, Alisher Sabirov.

Sabirov, who formerly wanted Kyrgyzstan to adopt restrictive internet legislation similar to that in Kazakstan, said that following consultations with Kyrgyz media representatives, it was decided not to introduce a new law. Instead, the Kyrgyz parliament decided to amend existing legislation in areas like stopping pornography and preventing incitement to violence.

The law adopted last June means the internet is governed by the same restrictions that already apply to print and broadcast media. Along with banning the publication of classified information, terrorist or extremist propaganda and pornography, it also forbids sedition, bans foreign nationals from using the web for electioneering or inciting workers to strike, and allows the authorities to block access to websites based abroad if their content is deemed to contravene national laws.

Sabirov said Kyrgyzstan is a leading user of the internet in Central Asia and adopting a particular law would hinder its development.

This decision was taken before the IWPR meeting but thanks to the extensive coverage the meeting received in the regional press, it reached a much wider public.

Another speaker, the head of information department of the Tajik foreign ministry, Davlat Nazriev, told participants that the IWPR meeting would contribute to the debate in Tajikistan, which does not have an internet law.

He said, it will serve as “a serious step for debating the topic raised [at the gathering] and for putting together recommendations” on dealing with the internet.

Participants noted that in its 2009 Press Freedom Index, the Paris-based watchdog Reporters Without Borders ranked Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan 160th and 173rd, respectively, out of 173. Kazakstan at 142 and Kyrgyzstan at 125 also scored poorly, while Tajikistan performed best of the five Central Asian states at 113.

Particularly bad was the performance of Kazakstan, which slipped 17 points compared to the 2008 listing because of its draconian internet law.

Kazakstan’s situation is somewhat paradoxical as along with its poor media freedom rating it has one of the highest rates of internet usage in the region of around 15 per cent.

Anton Morozov from the Kazak Institute for Strategic Studies showed how gradually reduced prices by internet service provider Kazaktelecom had led to an eight-fold increase in the number of internet subscribers.

Morozov said that if the drop in prices continues and wireless technology spreads at the same speed as at present, then internet usage will go up further.

Antonov said it was understandable that this expected growth in internet usage had prompted the Kazak authorities, worried about the disadvantages of the internet, to introduce the legislation, “Taking this into account it is understandable why the state wanted to have preventive measures and to establish control over the internet.”

There was a widespread consensus among participants that internet censorship is a problem in Central Asia.

Almaty-based IWPR regional editor Adil Jalilov said the most effective means of control is self-regulation, when users themselves monitor content.

According to an independent Uzbek journalist who wished to remain anonymous, the Uzbek authorities practice “filtering” of internet communication at various points like internet cafés and through internet providers. A list of more than 100 websites is blocked including sites run by the opposition and rights activists.

Another topic of the round table was whether human rights defenders are able to make the most of the internet in their work - be it raising awareness of particular issues or for advocacy. There was a widely shared view that civil society representatives are not benefiting from the internet due to a low level of internet skills and strict control.

An anonymous Uzbek rights activist said many Uzbek NGO representatives do not even have a phone connection, let alone the internet.

“Out of 165 members of our group only eight have computers and only half of them have internet access,” he said.

Jalilov also said that Kazak rights defenders are mostly from the older generation and are not internet-savvy.

His Kyrgyz IWPR counterpart, Sardar Bagishbekov, said that although rights defenders in Kyrgyzstan are better at using the internet for email and setting up websites, they are not benefiting from the use of social networking sites such Twitter and from blogging.

The head of a Kyrgyz NGO had a positive example of internet use. Abdumomun Mamaraimov, chairman of the public fund Voice of Freedom, and also editor of the bulletin Rights for Everyone, said the internet helps to raise awareness about human rights. He said that although the authorities are not ready for a full dialogue with civil society, communication is facilitated by the internet.

According to Mamaraimov, officials from the prosecutor’s office, the interior ministry and the national security service are regular readers of his website, “When information about human rights violations is promptly published, government bodies do react to it.”

Irina Mednikova, director of the Youth Information Service in Kazakstan, who is also correspondent for Respublika.kz, said the IWPR round table was an eye opener because it was hard to have an overview of the development of the internet in the regional context.

Meeting with colleagues from across Central Asia to discuss problems around use of the internet in their respective countries happened rarely and allowed them to compare notes and learn from each other, she said.

“In Bishkek I realised how similar is the thinking of bureaucrats in authoritarian countries when it comes to the internet …,” Mednikova said.

She believes that lessons can be drawn on how to predict the authorities’ moves regarding curbing internet use, what methods of campaigning are the most effective and who within the authorities should be approached to get the message across.

In an appeal to leaders and governments of Central Asian states, to members of the parliament and to the media, participants at the IWPR meeting called for the following:

• to take into account the view of the wider public when proposing legislation or restrictions on the use of the internet and to conduct research before any such decisions are taken;
• to make the internet more accessible to the public, to make people better informed about human rights and to improve internet and computer literacy;
• to restrict state regulation of internet resources by creating optimum conditions for developing private initiatives
• to tax internet providers in a way that will enable prices for internet access to be cut
• to use internet technologies more actively to improve coverage of human rights issues
• to create a universal and open database of best practices of human rights related internet projects;
• to consolidate the efforts of rights organisations in the region with the help of the internet to improve human rights coverage;
• to actively train journalists, rights defenders and their target audiences in internet technologies, in publicising blogs, social networking sites and new methods of internet security;
• to make online journalism and internet projects one of the priorities in programmes and projects.

To the media:

• to provide regular and active coverage of human rights issues using internet resources;
• to adhere to principles of tolerance, objectivity, trustworthiness, balance and unbiased reporting in providing information as well as copyright in online journalism and to take responsibility for the information provided;
• to follow ethical standards in all internet publications.

Aigul Bolotova is Human Rights Reporting Project coordinator in Kyrgyzstan; Dina Tokbaeva is IWPR Kyrgyz editor.